Roe vs Wade anniversary

[Texashiker]

because nothing evokes more of an emotional response than percived bigotry.

This is politically strategic, but in reality, patently dishonest.

Calling anti-abortion a war on women is fear mongering.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Who is going to pick my strawberries?

The same folks who do now.

 

[nehalem256]

You mean all those liberals who believe that abortion should be legal, safe and rare?

I suppose Bill Clinton kind of qualifies as a liberal

"Abortion should not only be safe and legal, it should be rare."

BILL CLINTON, speech at DNC, Aug. 29, 1996

​

​

So then liberals ARE encouraging irresponsible behavior is what you are saying.

 

[Kadarin]

But if any of that happen to the man tough shit.

That's a sentiment that suggests that the legal system should take another look at the man's obligations in a situation where he gets a woman unintentionally pregnant.

In my opinion, the man should not be able to force the woman to carry a baby to term if she does not want to. Should she choose to do so, however, any future child support obligations are an entirely separate discussion not really relevant here in this thread.

The argument of "well, the man doesn't get a choice, so why should the woman?" isn't valid IMO because the situation is different.

 

[nehalem256]

Calling anti-abortion a war on women is fear mongering.

War on women is nothing more than a dog whistle for having society pay for whatever women want.

The War on Women
...
Beyond the familiar terrain of abortion or even contraception, House Republicans would inflict harm on low-income women trying to have children or who are already mothers

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/26/opinion/26sat1.html

 

[Victorian Gray]

So then liberals ARE encouraging irresponsible behavior is what you are saying.

<sigh> only in your fevered imagination.

It would truly be a miracle if , just once, you managed to construct an actual argument.

Get thee back to thine toaster.

 

[Texashiker]

The same folks who do now.

Children from some central American nation that are here on work visas?

 

[Victorian Gray]

War on women is nothing more than a dog whistle for having society pay for whatever women want.


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/26/opinion/26sat1.html

Wouldn't it be wonderful if all them wimmins were toasters? nehalem heaven.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Children from some central American nation that are here on work visas?

Is that who's doing the picking now? So, you're a proponent of child labour? Interesting.

 

[Texashiker]

Is that who's doing the picking now? So, you're a proponent of child labour? Interesting.

I buy strawberries every chance I get.

 

[Moonbeam]

Not only that, a good percentage of those were likely Democrat voters so it's a two-fer.

A good percentage of ant population aren't born with a brain defect, but we can't start practicing eugenics now,can we.

 

[Kadarin]

War on women is nothing more than a dog whistle for having society pay for whatever women want.

From a cost/benefit standpoint, I totally support the state paying for all the contraception and abortions women need or want, as it's all far, far cheaper than raising children on welfare and paying for their healthcare and schooling, and subsequent jailing. Unwanted children will almost certainly not be raised well, and the parents of unwanted children will likely not be as effective at contributing to the economy.

 

[LunarRay]

It would seem to me that the only criteria as far as the fetus is concerned that matters is WHEN does the Right to Life attach. It can't be based on some Religious notion but, rather, upon a medical opinion. We find ourselves living in a country where a plethora of faith belief as well as disbelief exist and that must be the overriding consideration as to the When question.
I figure that when a fetus that might survive aside from the mother it ought to have the Right to live! I don't accept a notion of certainty in this case or many others for that matter.... But... Might survive...

Regarding the woman a few issues seem to come into play... I'd agree with parental involvement up to some age of the woman... To have an abortion before viability of the fetus must rest with the woman if the other age of the woman issues are not relevant. Cause of event seems not relevant given what seem to be the Rights of the woman versus the beliefs held by parents... if they are relevant.

 

[BUnit1701]

A good percentage of ant population aren't born with a brain defect, but we can't start practicing eugenics now,can we.

Look up Margaret Sanger, the mother of Planned Parenthood. Turns out we may well be.

 

[Texashiker]

A good percentage of ant population aren't born with a brain defect,

Do you have a study to backup that claim?

 

[halik]

What if they all grew up to be Hitlers? That's 55million Hitlers, all because you cannot keep your religious views to yourself.

Oh the joys of making counterfactual arguments.

 

[LunarRay]

Do you have a study to backup that claim?

I have an interesting study.... http://cognition.ups-tlse.fr/_guyt/documents/articles/53.pdf

Hehehehe as an aside, Clinton Dawkins actually studied the behavior of chicks for his Ph.D. I can just see Tinbergen advising Dawkins on the egg versus the chicken theory.

Biologists give me the itchies.

 

[WHAMPOM]

My anti-abortion argument is that no person shall be devoid of life, liberty or property without due process of law.

How do we define life? By brain waves and heart beat.




Would you extend those same rights to the father and not require him to pay child support?

By your own argument life, liberty or property (boy that "or" LOL)some one with no legal right to property or liberty has no right to life. Personhood usually comes with reaching the age of majority, property rights, voting rights and control of their own body.

Rights of the father? Keep it in his pants or pay it out his ass.

 

[werepossum]

Back in my day we could have killed 100 million babys in half the time.

LOL!

Just another job Americans won't do.

 

[Moonbeam]

Do you have a study to backup that claim?

Yes. I have experimentally adduced that I can't type too good on my iPad mini, but understand I was just lashing out cause Glenn1 hurt my feelings.

 

[BoberFett]

Rights of the father? Keep it in his pants or pay it out his ass.

Is that part of your War on Men?

 

[Moonbeam]

55 million...that's a hell of a lot of protein to throw away. /s

I know and they are soooooo good fried in Bisquick batter

 

[LunarRay]

I know and they are soooooo good fried in Bisquick batter

I'd enjoy witnessing an alien arrival to our planet.... aliens with oh... a hundred thousand years more evolution under their belts.... They'd likely shun the giraffe and zebra in favor of some plump tasty humans for breakfast.... Maybe with a side of eel.

 

[werepossum]

I am pro-choice, and I strongly support the 2nd Amendment and firearm rights. And the death penalty.

+1 I see absolutely nothing contradictory about any of those positions.

Because only women can get abortions? Frankly, I'm disgusted with the hyperbole we use to discuss ANYTHING in the political sphere. It isn't about rights, it's a "WAR ON <GROUP>." It takes away the ability to form rational arguments because everything is taken to such an illogical extreme. What's the opposite of pro-life; anti-life? Do I want to kill everything in the world because I think abortion should be allowed? So, yeah, I think the "war on women" language is ridiculous. I know pro-life people, and not one of them opposes abortions because they hate women (even women who make poor choices). Framing the argument that way is ridiculous.

Damned well said. Like most difficult issues this is not a right side/wrong side thing, and trying to make it so is just silly. It's a terrible thing to kill a baby, and it's a terrible thing to force a woman to carry a baby she does not want to carry. Regardless of which side one decides to support, the other side should be able to accept that there are valid points to be made.

 

[MrPickins]

I am pro-choice, and I strongly support the 2nd Amendment and firearm rights. And the death penalty.

:thumbsup:

I have no idea why people feel the need to toe the party line, or automatically think that if someone disagrees with them on one issue that they disagree on all the issues.

Partisan politics FTL.